Skip Navigation

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2009 24(3):i; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfp046
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2009]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org


In this issue

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

An editorial comment critically evaluates CKD classification and suggests that the classification of CKD should be improved, particularly for stage 3 where the clinician's input will likely be required.

See editorial comment by Poggio and Rule, pages 698–700

A lucid editorial comment on recently published meta-analyses that question the use of some β-blockers, mostly atenolol, in hypertension. The authors, experts in the field, recommend that given the high prevalence of CVD in CKD, and the observed . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?